The article is scary. I suspect it boils down to carry a P&S and
everyone thinks you're just an amateur. Carry a big SLR and lens and
you're not only a professional, but you're easily identified as a
photographer not a snapper.
On this theme:
I teach Photography at my local secondary school near London. The Local
Authority has laid down very strict (too strict, in my view) guidelines
for photography in school. Even after I'd stopped to think, they will
make my life much more difficult - I reckon I'm going to have to try to
monitor everything my students photograph...and staff as well.
To summarise:
Pupils' photographs can only be taken on an official school camera - not
on a teacher's personal camera or mobile phone.
Pupils' photographs must under no circumstance be taken home in case a
paedophile in your own home has access to them.
Pupils' photographs must not be held on personal computers at home.
Pupils must be at all times appropriately dressed - e.g. never
photographed in leotards or swim suits which makes a mockery of swimming
competitions / galas, gymnastics, dance, athletics, etc. (Don't know
what to think about my older girls (16+) who frequently wear low-cut
tops! At least I don't normally photograph them)
Pupils must not be photographed without written parental permission (I
do actually agree with that one - if they are under 16)
The guidelines make no reference to memory cards or sticks which can
easily be loaded up with photos and removed by anyone who wants them.
Where we stand on photographing pupils for school records, I don't know.
How a school photographer will cope with this I don't know.
I have hundreds of photographs taken at school going back to when the
school opened, in 1973, including some - horror of horrors! - of girls
in leotards doing gymnastics. Taken at school's request!
The whole issue is sheer paranoia. There apparently is no evidence that
any children have come to harm from school photography.
There is always going to be a small minority of paedophiles in schools
and obviously they need to be identified and removed from their jobs.
But this blanket approach serves no value in that regard.
Here's a link to photographs I took for a local teacher training scheme
<http://leigh-photography.co.uk/SCITT-Index.html>. I've broken the
obvious guideline here of not taking photos home, though the guideline
wasn't operative at the time. I will be taking these down soon as they
are no longer needed.
Howard
P.s. Quite the contortionist the person in the photo...do I see two
thumbs on one hand?
Rich Mason wrote:
Bonus points for anyone who can tell me what's wrong with the picture
that accompanies that article.
Cheers,
Rich
On Apr 18, 2008, at 4:50 AM, jonathan turner wrote:
Saw this on the BBC website, thought it may be of interest;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/technology/7351252.stm
Personally all this paranoia makes me hopping mad!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Turner
Photographer
e: home@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
t: 0113 217 1275
m:07796 470573
7 Scott Hall Walk, Leeds, LS7 3JQ
http://www.jonathan-turner.com
